U.S.

Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Office of the Clerk
5107 Leesburg Pike. Suite 2000
Falls Church, Virginia 220./ I

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - HAR

P. 0. Box 230217
Hartford, CT 06123-0217

Name: LUCERO, VICTOR MANUEL

A 074-912-171

Date of this notice: 5/20/2016

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Sincerely,

DorutL CaftAJ
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members:
Kendall-Clark, Molly

Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/
Cite as: Victor Manuel Lucero, A074 912 171 (BIA May 20, 2016)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Makabi, Perham
Law Office of Perham Makabi
125-10 Queens Blvd Ste. 319
Kew Gardens, NY 11415

,,,
U.S. D~partment of Justice

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

File: A074 912 171 -Hartfo rd, CT

Date:

MAY 2 0 2016

In re: VICTOR MANUEL LUCERO

MOTION
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Perham Makabi, Esquire

This case was last before us on January 12, 2006, when we affirmed the Immigration Judge's
now
October 13, 2004, decision to deny his request for adjustment of status. The respondent has
c).
1003.2(

C.F.R.
8
See
2016.
12,
filed an untimely motion to reopen proceedings on April
The Department of Homeland Security opposes the motion, which will be denied.
The respondent's filing does not demonstrate that he qualifies for any exception to the timely
not
filing requirement imposed on motions to reopen proceedings. Id. Further, his motion does
reopen
to
n
discretio
demonstrate an exceptional situation that would warrant the exercise of our
(BIA
proceedings under our sua sponte authority. See Matter of J-J-, 21 I&N Dec. 976, 984
hardship
great
suffer
would
s
1997). The respondent argues that his United States citizen relative
and a
if he were to return to Ecuador, and he has proffered, inter alia, letters of support
.
psychological report indicating that his wife suffers anxiety in anticipation of his removal
not
has
he
While we sympathize with the respondent's desire to remain in the United States,
See
demonstrated eligibility for cancellation of removal under section 240A(b) of the Act.
a
of
service
upon
section 240A(d)(l) (continuous physical presence in the United States ends
Notice to Appear).
However, the respondent also argues that he did not file this motion in a timely manner
2006
because he never received the Board's 2006 decision. We agree that the Board mailed its
151
Street
decision to "42 Osborne Street Apt. 12 Danbury, CT 06810" instead of the "42 Osborne
In an
Floor Danbury, CT 06810" address as reflected on the respondent's EOIR-26 appeal form.
.
decision
2006,
abundance of caution, and on our own motion, we will reissue our January 12,
In all other respects, the motion will be denied.
ORDER: The Board's decision dated January 12, 2006, attached hereto, is hereby reissued
and shall be treated as entered as of today's date.
FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reopen, and accompanying stay request, are denied.

FOR THE BOARD

..

Cite as: Victor Manuel Lucero, A074 912 171 (BIA May 20, 2016)

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review
Falls Church, Virginia 22041

A74-912-171 - Hartford

In re:

LUCERO, VICTOR MANUEL

Date:

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

MAl 2 0 2016

APPEAL

BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Pro se

'

ON BEHALF OF DHS: Leigh Mapplebeck, Assistant Chief Counsel

ORDER:
PER CURIAM. The Board affirms, without opinion, the results of the decision below. The
decision below is, therefore, the final agency determination. See 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(e)(4).

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

File: